@COOL_AND_MANLY, for whatever reason I haven’t seen many of your posts, so I’m not sure I have a well-formed impression of you. For what it’s worth you don’t strike me as LII; this kind of thing is difficult to tell from writing, but you seem to have a more direct style of communication and ‘presence’ where LIIs are more impersonal, abstract, and long-winded. To some extent this description is true of most intuitive types, so I’d tally points for being a sensor. I also guess that most LIIs wouldn’t confuse themselves with SLEs. ILEs might, but generally they seem more ‘playful’, and something else makes me think ILE to be unlikely. I also get the impression you’re Fe-valuing, which others have mentioned a few times — that restricts possible choices to Alpha and Beta.
If we further restrict our choices to sensing types, we have Beta STs and Alpha SFs. LSI seems the most likely to me because of their similarities with both LIIs and SLEs, and because your post about not wanting to be a bouncer/work in a high-Se environment makes SLE seem unlikely. “But FP,” you may say, “Isn’t Se an LSI’s creative function? Wouldn’t an LSI feel comfortable in that environment?” To which I’d reply “I dunno man, but in my anecdotal experience LSIs don’t usually seem willing to do such work or be too mean for very long; maybe it’s because of they’re Fe-seeking.”
The other option is of course Alpha SFs. I don’t actually think Sol’s guess was as terrible as it sounds, but, regardless, I’d also rule out SEI. For one, SEIs are more wrapped up in their thoughts, and this usually produces a definite impression in writing which you don’t give. For another, I think SEIs are probably the most unlikely, after Se-vulnerable types, to identify with Se-types. ESE might be an option. To be honest I’m not sure how ESEs tend to communicate through writing, but I wouldn’t guess you’re an extraverted type.